From owner-freebsd-current Mon Aug 24 22:44:16 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA04371 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Mon, 24 Aug 1998 22:44:16 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (ppp-d7.dialup.hilink.com.au [203.2.144.17]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id WAA04366 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 1998 22:44:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dingo.cdrom.com (8.9.1/8.8.8) with ESMTP id WAA02879; Mon, 24 Aug 1998 22:41:27 GMT (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Message-Id: <199808242241.WAA02879@dingo.cdrom.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: Chuck Robey cc: Kent A Vander Velden , freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Threads across processors In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 24 Aug 1998 23:45:31 -0400." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1998 22:41:26 +0000 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > On Mon, 24 Aug 1998, Kent A Vander Velden wrote: > > > > > Hi. Does -current support spliting the threads of a single process > > across multiple processors? > > Current still has user threads, which are pretty much unaware of which > processor there on. There's been work towards kernel threads, but it's > not yet to the point that you can play with it. This level of thread support requires that *all* thread mutexes be handled by the kernel (atomicity guarantee). It's several major steps beyond where we are now, and not something that's necessarily a good idea. -- \\ Sometimes you're ahead, \\ Mike Smith \\ sometimes you're behind. \\ mike@smith.net.au \\ The race is long, and in the \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ end it's only with yourself. \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message